FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
Get a better TV with a 'vivid' mode to make it pop. Looks damn good.
So good in fact that I wonder what this next gen update is really going to offer.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Fallout 4 vs. Starfield: Which Is Better, and Why?
- Thread starter FinalBossWithTheMostPower
- Start date
- Opinion Poll
Get a better TV with a 'vivid' mode to make it pop. Looks damn good.
So good in fact that I wonder what this next gen update is really going to offer.
Markio128
Member
Fallout 4 isn’t my favourite Bethesda game (falls behind a few of the Elder Scrolls games), but it I did enjoy it, and I’m looking forward to playing the native PS5 version. I haven’t played any of the DLC either, so picked those up for cheap this week ready for another playthrough.
Starfield can suck my balls.
Starfield can suck my balls.
vaibhavpisal
Member
From top of my head, setting game on different planets changes at least these aspects:
Starfield is the same shit a typical Bethesda games are - filler and shit engine. Works great with Morrowind, ok with Skyrim and Fallout 4.
Quest design: should the quest be on same planet or different planets. How to not make player feel like constantly jumping between planets.
Exploration gameplay loop: You can explore a planet, but also take your ship and explore star systems. How much of each type should be available? Which is more fun?
There is more am sure, I will find more differences as I dig deeper.
I think it’s breaking lots of new ground. Biggest one is moving away completely from Ubisoft brand of open world design.
MikeM
Member
Harbour and Nuka World are fantastic
FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
Stoked to hear this.
I never played either of them and am saving the DLC portion of the game for the update.
willothedog
Member
Like them both but Starfield pips as love me some outer space shenanigans.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Fallout
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Luckily, they took a chance on a new IP instead. Thank god. One of the only major budget new IP this gen.
Last edited:
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
Yep. Those are considered the best DLCs out of the bunch. If anything, just play those two with the main and forget the rest.
Negotiator101
Member
Will play Fallout after the patch and am looking forward to it. Starfield was a great game IMO but not a classic and apparently Fallout 4 is so we shall see.
Matt_Fox
Member
Yes creatively absolutely, but purely from a business perspective I'm certain Fallout 5 would have significantly outsold it - and with the uptick in sales of Fallout 4 after the Amazon show, with hindsight you can say that choosing Starfield over Fallout 5 was a mistake.
Matt_Fox
Member
The Automatron DLC is really cool too, and adds customisable groovy 1950s era robots into the game.
BusierDonkey
Member
I prefer Fallout 4, and by quite a lot.
Fallout has a superior cast of characters, a better story, better writing, a better settlement system, more diverse locations, better atmosphere, better environmental storytelling. better weapons/armor and a better crafting system, and the world itself was absolutely packed with unique places to explore and things to find. Despite being limited to a caricaturized version of a single city, I found exploration in Fallout 4 vastly superior to running in straight lines for hours on every planet I landed on in Starfield. Bethesda's formula over the years has been that every time you find something of interest, you can turn in place and spot another point of interest withing a short distance, it's how people get so sidetracked in their games. The fact that each location is a handcrafted, unique place made exploration rewarding. In Starfield you can find the exact same building with identical "lore" note spread about in dozens of places in a single playthrough. You can find Fallout versions of real-world locations around Boston and dig up their stories. Hell, even the bar from Cheers in Fallout 4. At every turn there is an example of a type of humor that I only ever find in Bethesda's games, where Starfield just feels devoid of any semblance of character. Mod tools were available comparatively fast. I spent more time in Fallout 4 than any other game, well over 4000 hours, thanks in large part to mods. Though the gunplay itself in Starfield feels better, there is no VATS eqivalent, no dismemberment, hell the enemies don't even actually show any damage at all, nor do the creatures in the big empty worlds they just stop animating and fall in a heap. For all its faults Fallout 4 is a much more complete experience than Starfield was.
Starfield was my most anticipated game, ever. I've wanted a game like it since I was a kid and being a huge fan of Bethesda's sandboxes over the years, I was even more excited for their take on space exploration. In the end it was the most disappointing game I've ever played. The tedious exploration frankly sucks, there are no land vehicles, no in-atmosphere flight, everything is so limiting. The game's aesthetic is completely hit-or-miss. Ship, weapon and suit designs were awesome for the most part, but the worlds and characters themselves seem like they were created under multiple directors and lack cohesion. Massive expanses full of copy/paste buildings that you aren't the first to discover. In a game where you're supposed to be exploring the unknown, it sucks that every single place you visit has already been found by someone else, usually with their perfectly pristine corpse there. The characters in the game are all single-note personalities, many are outright unlikable. Despite being "the least buggy Bethesda game", the game runs as bad as Fallout 4 did at launch, often much worse. This game has more quest-breaking bugs in it than any Bethesda game I've played. I had to use console commands to complete five quests for a variety of issues, ship bay doors stopped opening after about 20 hours and ships in space no longer spawn NPCs outside the important unkillable NPCs but they are all non-responsive. My settlements disappeared entirely from the map and can no longer be accessed so I lost dozens of hours of work. I can't start a new game plus because the other me became unresponsive the end of the game so if I want to experience the NG+ stuff I have to restart my playthrough. I was also looking forward to getting in on the ground floor with mods and making some of my own with what I learned modding Fallout 4 but Bethesda still hasn't released mod tools and at this point I've lost interest in the game. I put a lot of hours into the game but the characters and world in the game were entirely forgettable. What a shame.
Fallout has a superior cast of characters, a better story, better writing, a better settlement system, more diverse locations, better atmosphere, better environmental storytelling. better weapons/armor and a better crafting system, and the world itself was absolutely packed with unique places to explore and things to find. Despite being limited to a caricaturized version of a single city, I found exploration in Fallout 4 vastly superior to running in straight lines for hours on every planet I landed on in Starfield. Bethesda's formula over the years has been that every time you find something of interest, you can turn in place and spot another point of interest withing a short distance, it's how people get so sidetracked in their games. The fact that each location is a handcrafted, unique place made exploration rewarding. In Starfield you can find the exact same building with identical "lore" note spread about in dozens of places in a single playthrough. You can find Fallout versions of real-world locations around Boston and dig up their stories. Hell, even the bar from Cheers in Fallout 4. At every turn there is an example of a type of humor that I only ever find in Bethesda's games, where Starfield just feels devoid of any semblance of character. Mod tools were available comparatively fast. I spent more time in Fallout 4 than any other game, well over 4000 hours, thanks in large part to mods. Though the gunplay itself in Starfield feels better, there is no VATS eqivalent, no dismemberment, hell the enemies don't even actually show any damage at all, nor do the creatures in the big empty worlds they just stop animating and fall in a heap. For all its faults Fallout 4 is a much more complete experience than Starfield was.
Starfield was my most anticipated game, ever. I've wanted a game like it since I was a kid and being a huge fan of Bethesda's sandboxes over the years, I was even more excited for their take on space exploration. In the end it was the most disappointing game I've ever played. The tedious exploration frankly sucks, there are no land vehicles, no in-atmosphere flight, everything is so limiting. The game's aesthetic is completely hit-or-miss. Ship, weapon and suit designs were awesome for the most part, but the worlds and characters themselves seem like they were created under multiple directors and lack cohesion. Massive expanses full of copy/paste buildings that you aren't the first to discover. In a game where you're supposed to be exploring the unknown, it sucks that every single place you visit has already been found by someone else, usually with their perfectly pristine corpse there. The characters in the game are all single-note personalities, many are outright unlikable. Despite being "the least buggy Bethesda game", the game runs as bad as Fallout 4 did at launch, often much worse. This game has more quest-breaking bugs in it than any Bethesda game I've played. I had to use console commands to complete five quests for a variety of issues, ship bay doors stopped opening after about 20 hours and ships in space no longer spawn NPCs outside the important unkillable NPCs but they are all non-responsive. My settlements disappeared entirely from the map and can no longer be accessed so I lost dozens of hours of work. I can't start a new game plus because the other me became unresponsive the end of the game so if I want to experience the NG+ stuff I have to restart my playthrough. I was also looking forward to getting in on the ground floor with mods and making some of my own with what I learned modding Fallout 4 but Bethesda still hasn't released mod tools and at this point I've lost interest in the game. I put a lot of hours into the game but the characters and world in the game were entirely forgettable. What a shame.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
I can of course see your point, but I'm honestly not sure. I'm one of those "Xbox tax" weirdos. Starfield isn't a perfect game, but the amount of negativity it received eclipsed all forms of rationality.
Fallout was probably saved by still being perceived as multiplatform when the show came out. The new popularity of FO4 just goes to show that sometimes all people need is a new narrative and to not just be pissy cunts. 9 years ago FO4 apparently was terrible, but now it's apparently awesome. The game stayed the same pretty much, but all that's changed is reality for a large number of people.
Once a negative sentiment takes hold, people usually run with it for about 10 years. Then after that 10 year exercise in mass hysteria, the fever breaks and people start to see reality. Happened with FFXIII, RE6, DMC, and on and on. Fallout 4 is one of those. Fallout 5 would likely have been tainted by the console wars.
Last edited:
Hugare
Member
Fallout 4 sucks but it's still better than Starfield
It's actually enjoyable to explore, for one.
Still, its the worst Fallout game. Story sucked even more than 3, the base building gameplay is forced into story quests and the quests arent as good as 3 or NV
You waking up after hundreds of years, not knowing shit about the state of the world, then minutes later fighting a bunch of raiders, getting a power armor and fighting a Deathclaw with it was just ... ugh
God I hate this game
It's actually enjoyable to explore, for one.
Still, its the worst Fallout game. Story sucked even more than 3, the base building gameplay is forced into story quests and the quests arent as good as 3 or NV
You waking up after hundreds of years, not knowing shit about the state of the world, then minutes later fighting a bunch of raiders, getting a power armor and fighting a Deathclaw with it was just ... ugh
God I hate this game
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
I think fallout 4 is the better game out of the two for me. I like the vibe etc. Fallout is my jam.
I expected starfield to be amazing based on fallout and oblivion but it is just a little too sterile. It misses the mark of what I expected. I still enjoy my time with it and I'll be back for the dlc but fallout 4 is the better game out of the two.
I expected starfield to be amazing based on fallout and oblivion but it is just a little too sterile. It misses the mark of what I expected. I still enjoy my time with it and I'll be back for the dlc but fallout 4 is the better game out of the two.
panda-zebra
Member
Poll doesn't give enough option so no vote. Will give Fallout 4 one last chance with the patch, ignoring the base-building crap as much as possible and hoping to try to find a good game in there somewhere. But it remains the only gave I've bought, hated and then given away because I no longer wanted it even on my shelf - that's how terrible it went for me at launch.
Fallout 3 is in my top 10 most loved games of all time, no other game has had me go back and re-play just for the fun of it/doing different stuff/doing the exact same stuff/arsing around collecting weird things just because. I gave 76 a go a few months back because I really miss Fallout games- awful stuff.
Fallout 3 is in my top 10 most loved games of all time, no other game has had me go back and re-play just for the fun of it/doing different stuff/doing the exact same stuff/arsing around collecting weird things just because. I gave 76 a go a few months back because I really miss Fallout games- awful stuff.
manfestival
Member
honestly both games are meh but I enjoyed my time with starfield more than fallout 4(somehow)
The Fallout show is a healthy reminder of why the ''hurr durr ur just blinded by nostalgia'' argument makes no sense
Older things can be objectively better.
Let's look at the opposite of nostalgia. How many gamers you guys think cuck themselves into trying to like mediocre slop just and only because it's socially relevant?
Older things can be objectively better.
Let's look at the opposite of nostalgia. How many gamers you guys think cuck themselves into trying to like mediocre slop just and only because it's socially relevant?
semiconscious
Member
any fallout game is better than any other bethesda rpg. the fallout universe itself is simply endlessly more original, amusing, & entertaining than anything else they've developed...
Last edited:
graywolf323
Member
definitely Fallout, my fave was 3 (because of D.C.) but even still I had fun exploring Boston and the surrounding area in 4
nothing in Starfield gave me that same sense of exploration, I think that’s where they really struggled thanks to the procedurally generated worlds which copied & pasted things
nothing in Starfield gave me that same sense of exploration, I think that’s where they really struggled thanks to the procedurally generated worlds which copied & pasted things
MAX PAYMENT
Member
I think they're both extremely similar.
Randall365
Member
Fallout 4 was good but felt bloated and a bit janky. They could have made the World smaller, the main story shorter and reduced the combat, but made it more satisfying (so you weren’t just dispatching tons of flies and grunts) and it would have been great. The building part was unnecessary too and clearly just a trial to see if they could create some sort of GAAS/MMO spin off.
Haven’t played Starfield.
Haven’t played Starfield.
Last edited:
Larxia
Member
I haven't played Starfield, but I'm not interested in it for one simple reason : The environments are randomly generated. This completely removes the sense of immersion that you get in other Bethesda games. Visiting the same area gain and this time it's different, nothing in the world exists outside of that one area you are in... Yeah no. Just knowing this I know I'd prefer any of the other Bethesda games, Fallout 4 included.
vaibhavpisal
Member
I think you will be surprised.
They have nailed this aspect. Dont know how. Its procedurally generated but it follows principles of what makes for a beautiful landscape to look at. And music is also top tier and complements it.
Normally this would be subjected to great discussion and praise. Somehow all that is lost now and people who should’ve sparked these discussions are simply writing it off.
GnomeChimpsky
Member
I still think Starfield has potential once modders crack that shit open, but even unmodded Fo4 is a real solid action RPG imo.
winjer
Gold Member
Several modders already said it's not worth it.
So don't expect anything special from modding Starfield.
Lucifers Beard
Member
Fallout 4 is at least a reasonably decent survival type game with RPG elements that has an OK open world.
Starfield just isn't a very good game at all in my opinion. I will revisit it at some point to at least satisfy my curiosity after it has had some patches, but I really didn't like it and gave it a good shot.
Starfield just isn't a very good game at all in my opinion. I will revisit it at some point to at least satisfy my curiosity after it has had some patches, but I really didn't like it and gave it a good shot.
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
Can't say I'm a big fan of Fallout 4, but it's a complete game with a vast overworld, true exploring and shitton of quests of very varying quality. With great setting to boot, even if the best parts of it are not written by Bethesda.
Starfield felt more like some sort of proof-of-concept than an actual AAA game. I have a feeling that it was mashed together in 2 years after yet another concept reboot because Emil wasn't in the mood last Sundau or something. Starfield's main flaw is that it's basicaly not a BethSoft-style game at it's core. There's no vast interconnected overworld to get yoursel lost into. There's no coherent lore and very little in-game literature. There's no new ideas (like crafting or settlements in F4, tho I was not a fan of that direction). Even art is not that interesting and Starfield started to look plain and samey very quickly.
F4 wins by a landslide in my books. Maybe it's not that great (for me, at least), but with mods to boot it's a mildly enjoyable and fully fleshed-out survival RPG at the very least. And great Bethesda-style openworld at the very best.
Starfield felt more like some sort of proof-of-concept than an actual AAA game. I have a feeling that it was mashed together in 2 years after yet another concept reboot because Emil wasn't in the mood last Sundau or something. Starfield's main flaw is that it's basicaly not a BethSoft-style game at it's core. There's no vast interconnected overworld to get yoursel lost into. There's no coherent lore and very little in-game literature. There's no new ideas (like crafting or settlements in F4, tho I was not a fan of that direction). Even art is not that interesting and Starfield started to look plain and samey very quickly.
F4 wins by a landslide in my books. Maybe it's not that great (for me, at least), but with mods to boot it's a mildly enjoyable and fully fleshed-out survival RPG at the very least. And great Bethesda-style openworld at the very best.
Phobos Base
Member
Disagree with that, most planets are just endless miles of empty terrain so being random makes no real difference, plus you end up with immersion ruining aspects like a temple that no human has ever set eyes on with an outpost 100 meters away.
Starfield was a massive disappointment for me, the most damning thing I can say about is that after all those years in development it feels like a Fallout mod.
STARSBarry
Gold Member
I dislike Fallout 4 because it feels far less free. But compared to fucking Starfield? It's not even a contest, 4's the better game.
Last edited:
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
And it's the same outpost on every planet too.
At least F4 locations were truly handcrafted.
Last edited:
GnomeChimpsky
Member
Eh we'll see. Starfield has some very interesting game mechanics going on beneath the hood, so I don't think modders will give up on it even if Bethesda does. Might take a while though.
vaibhavpisal
Member
You are mistaking quests/settlements for landscape that procedural generation produces.
All facilities, buildings etc are handcrafted and part of a pool that spawns at those locations. Yes, those needed more variations and unique quests for exploration. Thats not what I am talking about though.
Touch fuzZy. get BizZay
Member
I guess fallout 4. Bethesda gradually getting worse
GHG
Member
The same handful of buildings and caves and facilities repeat across hundreds and hundreds of planets. This is well documented now.
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
.Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll